All posts by Rafe Mair

About Rafe Mair

Rafe Mair, LL.B, LL.D (Hon) a B.C. MLA 1975 to 1981, was Minister of Environment from late 1978 through 1979. In 1981 he left politics for Talk Radio becoming recognized as one of B.C.'s pre-eminent journalists. An avid fly fisherman, he took a special interest in Atlantic salmon farms and private power projects as environmental calamities and became a powerful voice in opposition to them. Rafe is the co-founder of The Common Sense Canadian and writes a regular blog at rafeonline.com. View all posts by Rafe Mair →

Basi-Virk: Curiouser and Curiouser as Basi Cousin Let off the Hook

October 25, 2010Canada, Politics, Western CanadaPoliticsRafe Mair

The Basi-Virk case just gets curiouser and curiouser. As we now learn, Basi’s Cousin, Aneal, as part of the deal, has been let off on his bribery charges.

How the hell did that happen?

Because, says a spokesperson for the AG’s office, Basi and Virk wouldn’t have made the deal otherwise!

Huh?! Are we to believe that the accused’s lawyers went to Crown Prosecutor and said “Look here, we’re prepared to plead guilty but you must do this: pay all our legal costs, promise not to try to collect this back from the assets you have under lien, remove those liens, and no jail time – and, oh yes, you must drop all charges against cousin Aneal who has admitted he took a bribe.” This isn’t a plea for mercy but a diktat as if they were winners doing the Crown a favour!

I think we can all guess what Mr. Berardino said which was something like this: “I’m honour-bound to put that to my client, and I will, and get back to you when I have an answer.”

Mr Berardino would have also, of course, told the AG’s ministry what the prospects of winning are and he would have told them something like this: “We are, as certain as you can get in court cases, going to win and they will certainly get jail time.” In effect, I’m sure he would have said, “It should be us who is stating the terms, not the accused.” Moreover, the Aneal Basi case is completely another matter all together. He would not have given Basi and Virk cause for celebration leaving it to cabinet.

As I traced it in a recent column, this offer would have gone, as quickly as lightening, to Gordon Campbell who would have heard what I just recited and, in order to save his skin, agreed to these outrageous terms dictated by the accused.

He would have had two concerns that we haven’t spoken much about – as stated by the Globe and Mail and by Mike Smyth in an excellent article in the Vancouver Province this past Friday – the deal whereby Basi and Virk would have all their legal costs taken care of included a deal that there would be no effort by the Crown to get the money back, even though there was about $600,000 assets under lien by the government for just that purpose..

The second matter is Aneal Basi’s case, which had nothing to do with Basi-Virk.

Now, Basi and cousin and Virk have admitted they took bribes in a case where, thick as thieves (an apt metaphor, I think) Campbell and his colleagues, sold off an iconic part of BC’s culture, BC Rail, for a song to CN. Surely this question arises: who paid these bribes? Were they in fact paid by one of the losing bidders through a lobbying company? Why weren’t they charged?

There can be no rational reason for the Crown to drop charges against Aneal Basi.

What we have here is like a country losing as war then dictating to the winner the terms of the peace treaty. We have the Premier of British Columbia accepting an outrageous settlement offer with unseemly haste and we have to once more ask, “Why?”

But there’s more. Where have the Liberal lickspittles who sit as MLA’s having sworn to do the people’s business been, and where are they now? By sitting on their hands, they actively support this disgraceful corruption. Are they devoid of principles? Does their love of office and the salaries and perks mean that they are prepared to ignore this disgusting settlement?

I direct this question especially to Ralph Sultan, MLA for West Vancouver -Capilano, one of the, if not the safest seat in BC. Sultan is a very successful businessman and has three Harvard degrees and a professorship in his resume. Sultan has been overlooked for cabinet even though, and I risk damning with faint praise, he is better qualified than any member of the cabinet, very much including the premier. Why wouldn’t this man holler foul from his safe perch? Show some backbone and stand up for decency and principles?

As Bob Simpson and Norm Macdonald of the NDP have demonstrated, it takes courage to speak out against your leader BUT isn’t it the duty of an MLA to refuse to go along with corrupt deals?

Toadies, lickspittles all.

On another matter, NDP president Moe Sihota hit the Labour Movement for money as a stipend for his duties saying that is standard practice though that appears not to be true.

Question for Moe: What if, while you were in government, the Liberals had paid their party president by funds from realtors or car dealers? Would you and your colleagues not scream from the heavens at this disgraceful practices? Nothing illegal here – just a health dose of hypocrisy.

Bill Otway – in memoriam

October 25, 2010UncategorizedRafe Mair

It’s with great sadness I learned of the death of Bill Otway, the sports fisherman’s constant warrior – taken from us on October 17, 2010, after a battle with cancer. Bill was a mainstay of the BC Wildlife Association and its executive director for many years.

I got to know Bill when I was a BC cabinet minister and I was one of three to hold a hearing on the Revelstoke Dam, even though it was irreversible. The BC Hydro lawyer was giving evidence and was consistently asked by Bill what would happen to a certain strain of Rainbow trout. He so exasperated the lawyer with this question he finally spluttered out “For God’s sake Mr. Otway, we already destroyed that species with the Mica Dam!”

Here’s a “now it can be told” story. The government I was in, with one exception (me), couldn’t care less about fish and the problems associated with them. I got a call from Bill one day in the Spring of 1979 when I was Environment Minister. He told me that the BC Wildlife Association was going under. As I remember it was $75,000 in the hole. I told Bill that I would do what I could but that I wasn’t hopeful.

Serendipitously, at the next Cabinet meeting we learned that because we had joined the national lottery (649), all of a sudden we had a bunch of cash outside the budget. What to do?

In the nothing ventured, nothing gained mode I put the case for the BCWF to my colleagues. I told my colleagues that these folks didn’t support the Socreds because we wouldn’t listen to them. To my enormous surprise the Premier asked “what was the amount again, Rafe?”

I told him it was $75,000 and Bennett said, I think we should do it and even though the rest of the room though he and I had lost our minds it was agreed. We were 18 in number but we knew that if the guy at the end of the table wanted something, the vote was suddenly 19-18!

I must here digress for a moment.

The City of Seattle had the right under an old deal with BC to raise the Ross Dam on their part of the Skagit River near Hope which would have flooded the river on our side, built a sizeable lake, and destroyed a beautiful, drifting, canoeing, and fishing river. This came to a head at the same time and I told Bennett that this simply couldn’t happen on my watch. He directed me to go to Seattle, and buy them off, which I did.

With the saving of the Skagit and the BCWF we gained a lot of Brownie points. This was all in April of 1979 and an election was far from my mind as we’d been less than 3 ½ years in power. When, right after these two events, Bennett called an election, I was as surprised as the rest of my colleagues and the media.

I don’t say and will not believe that Bill Bennett called an election because he had catered so grandly to the outdoors voters. He knew I was an environmentalist when he appointed me and while he certainly couldn’t have forecast the BCWF and Skagit issues, he knew that industry was not going to like having me in this position.

At any rate, at the same time as the election, BCWF, in its news letter, praised Bill and me to the skies and that sure as hell didn’t hurt! I can tell you that after touring much of the province helping out colleagues, I have no doubt that if we hadn’t done what we did, that very close election would have gone the other way!

Bill Otway, then, quite without intending it, may well have kept us in power.

I saw a lot of Bill during the 80’s when he took the boys from the hugely popular TV show “Dallas” hunting and fishing. In fact, I chaired at least one fundraiser for the BCWF when Larry Hagman, Patrick Duffy, Steve Kanaly, and Howard Keel were on hand. I did some radio interviews with them, I think all of them.

Bill and I went to Sweden to look at animal issues and how they handled them. We flew to London First Class (those days have gone!). Bill was a rough diamond and as we sat down I kidded Bill saying that if he behaved himself I promised not to tell anyone he’d flown in the front cabin. I was joking, of course, and his rejoinder was that, worse than this, he didn’t want anyone to know he’d flown with a god damned Socred cabinet minister!

As we were landing, Bill did something that we kidded about almost every time we met, in private and in public – he barfed his dinner and teeth into the barf bag! My reply to this interesting development was ” and you were doing so well, Bill!”

Bill loved the story.

Maybe you had to be there!

Bill always knew his brief and took care to be fully informed. That’s how he was able to speak for outdoors issues so well and was such a formidable debater. He was a consistent battler against the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and one need only talk to former senior scientists from that department to know how much they respected Bill and how much they wished the politicians would listen.

Bill had all the ingredients to carry the burdens he did – a smart, stubborn, fearless, and thoroughly decent man.

In Bill’s passing, British Columbia lost something it can ill afford to lose: a wise man who said what he thought, when he thought it, and without concern for whom he might offend.

Bill Otway is owed a huge debt of gratitude by us all. Our hearts go out to Carol and the rest of his family.

Rest in peace, friend.

Basi-Virk: The Plot Thickens

October 22, 2010Canada, Politics, Western CanadaPoliticsRafe Mair

So, the plot thickens and bit by bit we extract the truth out of the back-pedalling,
inkfish tactics being used by the Campbell government to explain the Basi-Virk bribe
– for bribe it was.

We started with Crown Counsel telling us, as the disclosure of the bribe was made,
that he did it all himself. He must have grossly underestimated the intelligence of
the BC people. As some teeth were extracted we learned that no, it wasn’t all by
himself, but from the Deputy Attorney-General, Criminal Justice Branch (ADAG).

Pause for a moment. The ADAG is a special role and not really part of the civil
service, this from a release by the Attorney-General’s Ministry:

“The responsibilities of Crown counsel are defined in the Crown Counsel Act. The act
ensures the independence of the prosecution service. Prosecutors are guided by the
policies of the Criminal Justice Branch and they are ultimately accountable to the
assistant deputy attorney general (ADAG). Under the act, the ADAG is head of the
Criminal Justice Branch and is responsible for the administration of the branch and
the day-to-day operations of the prosecution service. While the Attorney General is
responsible for overseeing the administration of justice in the province, the
Attorney General does not normally become involved in prosecution decisions relating
to individual cases.”

Now, as I’m sure you’re asking, how can the ADAG get instructions for settlement
without going to his boss, the AG?

The answer is that he can’t, nor, as we will see, can the AG make that decision.
Stay tuned.

Today we learn the key to the bribe when we’re told that the Deputy Finance Minister
was part of the negotiations which went back, incidentally, nearly three weeks
before the announcement. The Deputy Finance Minister is a public servant, under
Order-in-Council and reports to the Finance Minister. He chairs what is known as
Treasury Board Staff, better known as “Little Treasury Board”, which – and again
this from the AG’s office – “is responsible for developing and reviewing
government’s economic, fiscal and taxation policies. It provides analysis and advice
toTreasury Board (the Cabinet committee responsible for budget and management
matters) and to the Minister of Finance” through Treasury Board”, which is chaired
by the Finance Minister, Colin Hansen, and is comprised of Hansen and 7 senior
Cabinet ministers.

Pause. Now the path becomes a little clearer. Crown Counsel needs two things:
authority to make the deal in the first place, and $5 million in hush money. There
is no way the ADAG can make that decision and provide the money which is how the
deputy Finance Minister gets in the act. He has no authority to make this decision
either so he must go to Treasury Board, C.Hansen prop., and both ask for the money
and convince the Board that it’s needed. There is no way in the world that Hansen
with or without Treasury Board could make this decision, so the matter goes to
Cabinet, chaired by one Gordon “Pinocchio” Campbell.

There is another cute little fact finally disclosed: despite earlier denials, Basi
and Virk had to sign a confidentiality agreement – they couldn’t talk or the deal
was off! And who was that to protect?

It sure as hell wasn’t the public who had every right to know all the details.

Remember that Crown Counsel Berardino was winning the case and if he wasn’t sure of
that, he had to be when the accused offered to cop a plea. But follow me carefully
from here: If his remaining witnesses, Collins, Campbell, et al. would help Basi and
Vick’s case, Berardino was obliged to reveal that to the accused’s lawyers. We
therefore know that these witnesses to come would make Crown Counsel’s case all the
stronger.

Why then would Mr. Berardino want to bail out?

There are but two possibilities: either Berardino is as dumb as a sack full of
hammers and doesn’t understand these things, or he was told to settle on orders from
Gordon Campbell. In helping you make your choice, let me tell you that Mr. Berardino
is a very clever lawyer, one of the best courtroom lawyers in the province.

Clearly, this confidentiality agreement was intended to protect the political asses
of Messrs Campbell and Collins and other Liberal insiders.

Conclusion:- The $5 million bribe to Basi and Virk was authorized by Premier Gordon
Campbell who was in the negotiations from the beginning and knew that he and former
Finance Minister Collins and other key people in his clique, were going to be called
as witnesses which is why the bribe was paid.

Shocking End to Basi-Virk Makes Me Sick – Literally!

October 19, 2010Canada, Politics, Western CanadaPoliticsRafe Mair

What a grand day for the BC Liberals! What a great relief to former Minister Gary Collins! I can’t wait to hear Gordon Campbell praise the Crown, Crown Counsel Berardino, and the Justice system! The Crown bails out of the
Basi-Virk trial! How does that grab you?

Meanwhile I, as a lawyer, feel sick. I kid you not, when I received the news I felt a wave of nausea.

Before going further, it’s not uncommon to “cop a plea”. It’s a gamble the Crown and defense play when the Crown isn’t sure it can make the charges stick, and the defence, knowing full well that they’re guilty as hell, want to make the best of it. BUT, copping a plea usually comes at or near the beginning of the trial, not after years have passed and millions have been spent.

Now, if the accused were not guilty and at this advanced stage of the case Crown was unsure of its case, that would be one thing, but for God’s sake, the accused pled guilty! Not to a reduced charge but what they were charged with!

What then could the Crown have been thinking? What motivated this bizarre, quick ending?

I don’t know the answer, but this much is true: the appointment of Mr. Berardino in the first place has been criticized as putting him in at the very least a perception of conflict of interest. This calls into question the confidence the public has in the ability of the assistant deputy minister of the Criminal Law Division to appoint Crown Counsel without any outside interference. It’s not that I don’t trust the assistant deputy – it’s his boss and his boss’s boss I don’t trust to behave properly.

He’s Crown Counsel selected under the Crown Counsel Act, used when the accused is high profile and it’s desirable that there be no question of the Crown Counsel being in any way compromised. Here’s what the Criminal Justice Branch of the Ministry of Attorney General says “The Criminal Justice Branch operates independently of government and within the justice system. They do not represent the government, the police or the victim of an offence.” (My emphasis)

The reality of it is that Mr. Berardino, whether he knows it himself, was acting for the government in the sense that the government had a huge interest in the outcome. That interest was not as a bystander wondering if Basi and Virk would be convicted but whether or not the evidence pointed to wrongdoing by the government, any of its ministers, even the premier. Surely no one not having just arrived from Mars would doubt that this trial was the political trial of all political trials. Assuming that Mr. Berardino knew this, surely it’s fair to question his judgment in taking the case in the first place.

(I digress to make this point. Lawyers are fond of saying that their code of independence is such that even in a case where conflict appears, they can be counted upon to be the very soul of impartiality. If that’s so, why did we need a Crown Counsel Act in the first place?)

I cast and intend no inferences – I have no evidence that Mr Berardino has ever felt any pressure by the government, make no such allegations, nor ask that any adverse inferences be drawn.

What I do say is that it looks like hell and the “appearance”, the “perception” is awful. Surely common sense would say that since Mr. Berardino acts for the Crown and is paid by the government regularly, he cannot be counsel when that same government has a massive interest in the outcome of the case.

Let’s pause for a moment. It’s important to note that the “Crown” and the “government” are not the same thing. In the old legal saw, “the Crown neither wins nor loses – it simply places the evidence fairly before the court.” The question is not whether or not Mr. Berardino should have acted for the Crown but should he have acted where the evidence might embarrass the Crown’s agent, the provincial government?

The law is abundantly clear on the test to be applied: here is the oft cited aphorism of Lord Hewart from Rex v. Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy:

“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.” (Emphasis mine)

As a consequence of this “deal” these things have happened:

Basi and Virk, on very serious charges which one would think should have brought serious consequences, plead guilty as charged but all but get off scot free.
Gary Collins, then Minister in charge of the “lease” of BC Rail to CN, does not have to give evidence
Gordon Campbell will not have to testify which, considering his difficulty with the truth in other matters, avoids what for him might take considerable exertion
A case bringing more and more uncomfortable evidence by the day for the Campbell government is suddenly over
What really happened in this matter can only be speculated upon

I leave it with you, the citizens of British Columbia – was the settled test as enunciated by Lord Justice Hewitt, namely, “justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done” met in this case?

I doubt that even the 9% of the public that supports Mr. Campbell would think that it was.

Campbell’s Fiscal Fiasco: $50 Billion Private Power vs. NDP’s $460 Million Fast Ferries

October 12, 2010WATERWater and EnergyRafe Mair

Remember the “Fast Ferries” fiasco, friends?

That cost $460 million and more than any other issue brought the NDP down in 2001. What wastrels! cried the Campbell opposition. “A disgrace!” “Think of all the social programs that suffered!”

Can you imagine what the business community would have said if it had been 10x that, say, $4.6 Billion?

There would have been cries to send Premier Clark to jail! Maybe bring back capital punishment! I can imagine Phil Hochstein, the ever quotable spokesperson for and president of the Independent Contractors and Businesses Association. Phil can always be counted upon for a spirited speech in favour of capitalism at a hint of the NDP as a potential government. He would not only be speechless at $4.6 billion, he might well, poor chap, die of apoplexy!

What if the NDP had done 10x10x$460,000,000? Or even worse, say $50 billion and rising? I can’t imagine what poor Phil would do. At the very least he surely would have demanded that all members and suspected members of the NDP – and fellow travelers, of course – be banished into permanent exile! Are there no stocks in the public square? What’s happened to the prison hulks? Where’s Botany Bay when we really need it?

(Let me say here that I know and like Phil – it’s just that he has become such an eloquent spokesperson for the blessings of capitalism and, dare I say it, a sneering enemy of the left. He’s obviously the industry’s bulls-eye to shoot at if you care at all about the monstrous “rivers policy” of Pinocchio and his pals.)

$50 Billion is a conservative estimate of the amount BC Hydro must pay private power producers (IPPs) for power they cannot use – on a take or pay basis – and must sell at ½ price at best. These sweetheart deals are scarcely with little mom-and pop operations as we’re assured by Pinocchio, but huge out of Province corporations like Ledcor and General Electric; nor are they, as Finance Minister Colin Hansen assures us, harmless little old mills. almost invisible, spinning away, and lighting up all our homes.

These IPP plants, as anyone can see by just going up past Squamish to the Ashlu River, are environmental nightmares; they destroy the fish, thus the ecologies dependent upon the river, and require massive clear cuts to make way for roads and transmission lines.

Many of the larger projects – Bute Inlet, Klinaklini, Upper Pitt, Glacier/Howser – are on hold for indefinite periods because it’s occurred to the companies and the government that the public of BC won’t put up with them, with massive civil disobedience the obvious consequence. Stroll through this website and see Damien Gillis’s filming right around the province and see for yourself what these little Mom and Pop, unobtrusive plants look like when they’re in operation.

The companies and the Campbell government peddled these environmental and fiscal horror stories as “green” projects! In fact, in April 2009, when the NDP put out their platform condemning these projects for what they are, here’s what Phil Hochstein had to say:

“There can be no more damning evidence that the NDP has all but abandoned its green and youth voters in favour of the labour agenda than its opposition to green energy projects. Heralded by President Obama, and embraced throughout Europe, the development of a renewable energy industry is clearly the social, economic, and environmental opportunity of our generation. Yet, James and the NDP have come out staunchly in opposition to green energy projects. And why? Because the public unions don’t want any energy, green or otherwise, developed in B.C. unless it is under their control.”

Somehow Phil’s research missed the point that these projects, far from being green, were brown and that the use of that word is just what George Orwell told us would happen in his great book, 1984. It’s “newspeak” on the theory that saying that brown is green often enough the unwary public will accept it.

Free enterprisers like Phil didn’t notice, evidently, that BC Hydro, being forced to buy this “green” power from private power producers, on a “take or pay” basis for power they didn’t need – nor that BC Hydro was forced to buy this private power at double or more what it could sell it for, a sure prescription for bankruptcy.

This isn’t Phil’s fault – I only pick on him because he has so clearly articulated, for the business community, the bullshit the government was peddling.

Folks, it gets worse.

The principal market for this half price sale BC Hydro is forced to put on is California. Remember the beaming Premier looking lovingly into the eyes of Governor Terminator of California, aka Arnold Schwarzenegger, as they pledged their troth? Capitalist eyes wept in happiness at all that ½ price BC electricity heating swimming pools in California.

For this I’m indebted to Jim Quail, Executive Director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre. Referring to Campbell’s policy he says:

“This strategy has hit a roadblock, created by California’s environmental standards. They classify any run-of-river project rated above 30 Megawatts as non-green. That captures all of the hydroelectricity BC Hydro is buying from IPPs. Spot prices for this stuff are projected in the $35-40 range per MWh over the coming few years, but we will be paying IPPs as much as $120 per MWh. We’ll have to dump the surplus on the spot market for a huge loss. (My emphasis)

Premier Campbell has been lobbying hard to get California to raise its 30 MW limit for premium power, without success so far.Things could get even worse. There is a proposition on the California ballot for November which would suspend that state’s clean energy laws until unemployment drops below 5.5%. That could be several years. If this passes, our surplus IPP power will have no chance of gaining a premium price. There will be no market in California for high-priced ‘clean’ power.”

Even if California changes its mind, BC Hydro is faced with selling power it has been forced to buy at 50 cents on the dollar, tops!
Here’s the score, folks, in the fiscal f#@k-up department: On our left, wearing the pink undies, the NDP gave us Fast Cat ferries that didn’t work, at a loss of $462 million dollars.

On our right, in the blue bloomers, Gordon “Pinocchio” Campbell and his “green power” at $50 Billion, gives us power we can’t use and which must be exported to a market that isn’t there. (Always remembering, of course, that if they don’t go bust first, they might get up to ½ back, except that at Pinocchio’s insistence BC Hydro continues to enter new contracts!)

Over to you, Phil…

BC’s Energy Future: What to do with Private Power Contracts and Site “C”

October 4, 2010WATERWater and EnergyRafe Mair

There are rumours abroad in this province that Gordon Pinocchio Campbell is losing interest in private power projects and moving over to Site “C”. The apparent reason is that California refuses to consider the power green or clean – something the Common Sense Canadian has been saying for a long time. Whether this rumour is true or not, nothing is changed with respect those licenses now granted or those approved in principle awaiting the ersatz Environmental Assessment fiasco. What any new government would be obliged to do is open sill the existing contracts to the public – remember, these contracts were forced upon BC Hydro, our company – and if unfair, cancel them.

Carole James said in the last election that she would honour existing contracts and that simply doesn’t make sense. If she were running for mayor of a city on a pledge to clean up the corruptness of its previous leaders, and, upon winning, found that the contracts signed by them were all long-term, sweetheart deals with political pals, would she then honour the contracts? If so, what was the point of electing her?

We hear it said that if those contracts are tampered with, new business wouldn’t come and existing business would flee the province. That’s nonsense. If there are good business opportunities, businesses will come.

I believe that Ms. James and the NDP must put together criteria for examining these deals which would include seeing if the province of BC will benefit. If, as the truth unfolds, we find that these were long-term deals for government’s friends and donors; if we find out that most of the power produced by private power projects must be exported because they can’t make the power when BC Hydro can use it; if we see that the environmental damage is huge and irreparable; if we learn that BC Hydro is hurting badly and will soon be decapitated if it must continue to buy private power power at double what Hydro can sell it for and is thus on a clear path to ruin – under these circumstances the contracts have to be canceled, which can be done by an act of the Legislature. Too bad for the companies but they knew the contracts were theft, and thieves, whether corporate or not, deserve no sympathy.

Site “C” raises new issues. Damien Gillis and I both oppose this development and, no, we’re not against everything. British Columbia, contrary to government lies by Campbell and Colin Hansen, is not a net importer of power. BC Hydro is sometimes but BC Hydro isn’t the only power maker; when you count the others – Fortis, Alcan, and Teck-Cominco – BC is typically a net exporter.

The fact is that no power system can produce all the provincial needs under extreme difficulties. To maintain such a system would be horrendously expensive and wasteful. That’s why Burrard Thermal is needed and, as the BC Utilities Commission noted a year ago, ought to be expanded as our need grows.

But here is the point: Burrard Thermal must only be used when there is a serious shortage, which happens a few days a year – in the dead of winter when are needs are greatest and supply at its lowest.

Burrard Thermal, thanks to the Campbell government, has had a bad press. It’s not a pollution-belching plant at all. It uses natural gas which, after hydro power, is the next best producer.

Look at it this way: when a hospital is suddenly deprived of power, a backup system kicks in to cover off the (usually) short blackout. Some of my neighbours have back-up generators for the black-outs we get when hydro lines are down.

The public of BC have been very badly served by this government which has not been up front and honest about the power challenges in BC but has plainly lied through their teeth.

Site “C” is a debate the public – a well informed public – must have. Can we afford it? Most importantly, who are the target customers?

It’s said that even if it mostly exports power, there’s nothing wrong with that. This raises the critical question: is BC prepared to inflict serious and permanent environmental damage and ruin vital agricultural land in order to export the power produced? What if it’s designated for the Tar Sands and other egregiously bad environmental nightmares?

What Carole James and he NDP must do is come up with a policy and that policy must be to eliminate the secrecy and permit citizens to be heard not after the approval in principle has been given, but before. I realize that consulting the people is a shocking thought but not, I can tell you, to the people! Municipalities must be given back their right to zone power plants by repealing Bill 30. It strikes me as odd that people get to say their piece if the issue is a new building or a shopping centre or even it the proposed development is a store they don’t like, such as Walmart – but have no say when a private power producer wants to bugger up a river and the ecosystem it supports.

Governments generally, but especially this one, are scared of people participation in policy that directly gets in the way of government plans.

The public ate not to be trusted, says Mr Campbell – we know best!

A government that operates secretly and tries to shut out the public is begging for serious civil disobedience.

Fish Farms, Pipelines, Private River Power – What’s in it for Us?!

September 30, 2010Energy and Resources, Tar SandsAlberta Tar Sands, SalmonRafe Mair

What the hell is in it for us?

I hate to sound ungracious towards our friends and neighbours by asking that question but it’s occurred to me quite often and I, for one, would like an answer.

With fish farms, what the hell is in it for us?

Over 90% of the farms are foreign-owned . The license fees we collect are like a handful of sand is to Vancouver’s beaches. Our wild salmon are destroyed, the environment desecrated, and the loot all goes to big companies and their shareholders, mostly in Norway. Furthermore, because these companies are from out of province they don’t give a fiddler’s fart how much damage they do.

Jobs?

A few caretakers and that’s it.

We take all the risks, we take the certain environmental losses and they get all the money!

Whoops, I forgot that there is a BC beneficiary – the Liberal Party of BC and Gordon (Pinocchio) Campbell.

With pipelines shipping oil from the Tar Sands to Kitimat for passage through our waters – what the hell is in it for us?

The oil comes from Alberta so that only the Alberta and Federal governments get any royalties and other taxes – except maybe for the peppercorn rent for the pipeline right-of-way. We run many real risks in taking this filthy stuff over our province, through our delicate habitat, then shipping it down the most treacherous part of our coast and get nothing for it!

We have to do the policing for sabotage, terrorist attacks, or plain misadventure since Enbridge sure isn’t going to. And based on their track record, who would want them to be our watchdogs?

When the damage is done – and it will happen – we’ll have to bear the cost since Enbridge sure isn’t BP and a big loss could bankrupt them.

These questions apply to the oil presently being piped down to tankers in Burrard Inlet putting not only Vancouver Harbour at risk but all the BC coastline they sail past.

Moreover, as with fish farms, these companies are from out of province and don’t give a damn for our environment.

What’s in that for us?

Some rent for the right-of-way?

Jobs?

Sure there will be employment to build the line but that’s short term and most of those jobs will be from out of province.

We take all the risks and they get the dough!

Whoops! I forgot Pinocchio and his trained seals. (See “whoops” above for details.)

Independent Power Producers (IPPs) are building their dams (they prefer we call them weirs) on rivers all over the province to make electricity.

What the hell’s in it for us?

These are all large offshore companies that take the profits while we inherit buggered up rivers. But it’s worse – not only do we lose our rivers, we pay for these dams because our provincial company, BC Hydro, owned by me and thee, is forced to pay these IPPs double what their power can be sold for. Since IPPs don’t make much electricity unless their river is flowing quickly, as in the Spring run-off when BC Hydro doesn’t need it, Hydro must export it at a huge loss! Our loss as citizen/shareholders!

We don’t need their power – indeed can’t even use it – but we finance their plants by making Hydro give them sweetheart deals, we get a fast bankrupting BC Hydro, and the money goes mostly to non-BC shareholders like Warren Buffett and General Electric!

What’s in it for us?

Whoops again! (See above re Pinocchio and his lickspittles).

We’re chumps! Marks! Rubes playing Three Card Monte at the fair! We’re being robbed blind then we beg for more!

Think on this, gentle readers – we’re taking a three-way financial hit and a huge three-pronged attack on our environment, be it our salmon, our rivers, our harbours, our coastline, and our wild habitat and, through our government, we’re begging for more!

But I predict a change, an awakening of the people. When the Premier and the Attorney-General instructed Crown Counsel to ask for a life sentence for Betty Krawczyk for disobeying a court order to cease demonstrating, using two violent pedophile cases to back it up, it touched a lot of nerves. A life sentence for an 82 year-old for protesting an environmental desecration? Likening it to sexual violation of kids? What has this government come to?

There will be civil disobedience in BC and it won’t be pretty. We’ve been lied to enough. Our heritage is bring ripped apart not with government consent but at its request.

I’m not calling for civil disobedience – I’m saying it will come because this disgraceful government has asked, no begged for it.

Campbell’s Hypocritical Letter from 1998 on “Open Government”

September 24, 2010Canada, Politics, Western CanadaPoliticsRafe Mair

The document below – obtained recently by The Common Sense Canadian – is a slap
in the face to the many British Columbians who are all to familiar with this ruling
government’s secretive ways. Authored in 1998 by Campbell himself whilst Leader of
the Opposition, to the then director of the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy
Association, the letter slams the NDP government of the day for not being more
“open” with the public.

“Open government is the hallmark of free and democratic societies,” he begins.
“Regrettably, the NDP have abandoned their commitment to open government.
Expenditure cuts, the threat of fee increases, and the excessive reliance on FOI as
the only way of obtaining routine government documents are all evidence of a
government which prefers the practice of concealment to the culture of openness.
This is unacceptable.”

And on that one note, we wholeheartedly concur. If only Campbell hadn’t followed
this rant with the most secretive, obstructionist, and anti-democratic government in
the history of our province, we could now applaud his bold statement in hindsight.
But on the heels of the infamous Hansen HST memos – obtained only by FOI long after
the fact, and full of large tracts of white space covering up redacted text – it
reads now like a bad, Orwellian joke.

In the spirit of openness, see for yourself…

Campbell’s Injustice Toward Krawczyk a Catalyst for BC Environmentalists

September 24, 2010UncategorizedCivil LibertiesRafe Mair

Betty Krawczyk is a protester at the tender age of 82. Not long ago she was released from prison after serving 10 months for disobeying a court order.

How did this happen?

Through an abuse of power arising out of the government decision to take the Sea-to-Sky Highway over the top of Eagleridge Bluffs, a move bitterly fought by residents to no avail. Betty was sent to prison for defying a court injunction to stay away from the area which was being bulldozed to widen the highway ahead of the 2010 Winter Olympics.

Here’s how the system “works”. Betty, standing on public land, blocked machinery being used by Peter Kiewit & Sons, the huge construction company that for some reason does nearly all the government’s construction projects, so Kiewit went to court to get an injunction ordering Betty to stay away. Here’s the flim flam: this is a civil dispute but as soon as Betty disobeyed the injunction she was hauled before the Beak for criminal contempt of court. Betty was never permitted to discuss the merits of the construction decision by the Campbell government – the only issue is whether or not she disobeyed the court order.

All of a sudden Kiewit – and by extension the Campbell government – turned a civil dispute into a criminal case and this 79 year old (at the time) great grandmother was in the slammer for 10 months!

When Betty was finally released she launched an appeal because she thought the principle so important that she had to do so.

This past Wednesday her appeal was heard and the three judges concluded the proceedings with “judgement reserved” – meaning we will have to wait a little while longer to hear their verdict.

The Crown, on the instructions of the Campbell government cross-appealed and asked the court to follow two cases, both concerning repeated violent pedophiles who raped their own children. One case is entitled Regina v. C.A.M and the other is R.v. M (in the BC Court of Appeal).

Betty Krawczyk is to be compared to serious and violent pedophiles and dealt with accordingly!

In R.v.M. one judge’s opinion on the sentencing principle was:

“When an accused has been convicted of a serious crime in itself calling for a substantial sentence and when he suffers from some mental or personality disorder rendering him a danger to the community but not subjecting him to confinement in a mental institution and when it is uncertain when, if ever, the accused will be cured of his affliction, in my opinion the appropriate sentence is one of life.”

Can you believe it? Based on brutal pedophilia cases Gordon Campbell and his Attorney-General have asked the court to raise Betty’s sentence to LIFE IMPRISONMENT!!!

Nobody can be in any doubt as to the message here. This is intended to cow environmentalists into behaving themselves. Beware those who think they can speak freely and protest openly and effectively – we’ve a place for you and it’s called jail. And if you really make a nuisance of yourselves jail can be forever. So, be warned!

This will have precisely the opposite effect. It will galvanize the environmental movement into a unity of purpose that will mean that activism will mean just that – supporting Betty and, more importantly, following her example.

Let me pause here and explain what I mean by the environmental “movement”. It’s far more than tree huggers – though society owes them a huge debt of gratitude. It’s becoming mainstream British Columbians who, after a decade of being pushed around and lied to by the Pinocchio Campbell bunch, are fed up. It’s the jammed high school gymnasium in Pitt Meadows to protest the proposed damming of the Pitt River’s tributaries. It’s the town of Kaslo who had more people turn up to protest a government/industry so-called hearing than there were people living in the town! There is a sea change in the making here – the egregious environmental sins of this government are now becoming more and more apparent to people, good people, who want to trust their elected representatives but have been made fools of by doing it.

The job of education is scarcely over and this for a rather strange reason. The Campbell government’s policies are so outrageously bad that people think you’re kidding when you tell them about them.

After all, who would believe that a government would force BC Hydro to pay twice what the power is worth to private companies, that power being surplus to the needs of BC Hydro who must buy it anyway and then sell it at a huge loss? That’s loony tunes stuff! You are either kidding or telling a whopper!

Except it’s true. When I tell people that BC Hydro is on a fast track to suicide, assisted mightily by the Campbell crowd, no one can believe it! What sort of fools would do this?

C’mon, Rafe, give us a break! Get real!

Well, in fact it’s worse than that: BC Hydro, no longer making a profit so that they can pay their huge dividend to the BC treasury, will still pay that dividend.

How in hell can it pay a dividend when it’s losing money?

Easy. Simply raise the electricity rates to industry and the public then pay it back to them as a dividend!

What Betty Krawczyk has done is show this government for what it is – arrogant and utterly dishonest. Her courage is a prism through which ordinary citizens can see the reality of the Campbell crowd. Those who doubted or didn’t want to know what sort people these Liberals really are, look at them trying to throw an old lady in jail for life and all of a sudden what the environmental movement has been saying comes clearly into focus as the obvious truth.

This government’s attitude, so incredible as to be unbelievable has, because of the courage of this incredibly gutsy lady, is now there for all to see.

What we must now do is very difficult but it will be done. We must all unite in a political action group as is common in The United States. I’m not talking about a coalition – that’s impossible and not even a good idea. Each environmental group has its own special interest and that’s how it should be.

What must happen is all these groups, very much including The Common Sense Canadian, must present a united – and there’s no other honest word for it – attack on this government and make it clear that we will support no leader, no party, no candidate that will not express and put into action the ideals that we all believe in.

This cannot be simply a get rid of Campbell exercise – though that’s a hell of a good beginning – but a force to ensure that whoever replaces them clearly understands what the people of BC expect: the end of fish farms in our oceans, the end of paving over our farmland and wildlife preserves, the end of the destruction of our rivers and the end of killing the Fraser River because it’s cheaper to get gravel there than mine it safely and ship it to where it’s needed.

In short, Betty’s courage is the catalyst by which British Columbians can take back their province, restore what can be restored, and leave the rest intact for those yet to come.

Taking Hansen’s Lies on HST, Energy to the Court of Public Opinion

September 22, 2010WATERHST, Water and EnergyRafe Mair

Finance Minister Colin Hansen has, faintly, apologized for his handling of the HST.

Let’s get this straight minister – you didn’t make a mistake, you lied. You had two briefing papers, one written at your request, that 2 months before the election, gave you the skinny on an HST policy for BC. The question of HST was one of the most controversial finance issues in the country. You and the Premier knew that and your ministry and the Premier’s office had been in touch with Ontario and federal issues. To the long list list of the premier’s serial falsehoods – your 1:51 statement on private power, found by googling Hansen/private power, contains 5 statements each of which is false.

I bring this up for www.thecanadian.org because our talented filmmaker Damien Gillis and I will be starting a tour of BC in October and those whom we address ought to know that your credibility and that of your colleague Gordon (Pinocchio) Campbell will be severely challenged.

The purpose of our tour is, of course, not only to deal with your government’s lie-based Energy Policy, but to demonstrate what we can do in the area of self-sufficiency for BC power needs without ever damming so much as a tiddler’s creek.

The opening question will run like thus: if you, Mr, Mrs, and Ms British Columbian, wanted to have BC energy self-sufficient for the foreseeable future, what would you do?

We will then lay out our plan and compare it to that of your government. In dealing with this matter we will point out the credibility shortcomings of you, the premier and your government. High on the list will be your five statements alluded to above; we will deal with each of them, and ask the public whether they believe you. But we will also lay before the public the relatively simple route we can take – the route your government should have followed.

We will demonstrate that not only have you denied the public a right to be heard – you have forbidden local governments to zone power projects according to the needs and desires of the local population.

Your difficulty, Mr. Hansen, and through you to the premier, is that no one believes you any more. During the time the public, very much including me, was asleep at the switch, no one was challenging you. We trusted and believed you. We saw your energy plan as having no environmental impacts and necessary for our energy needs because that’s what you told us.

As you know, minister, I’ve been there. And I know that even the most of unpopular programs will be accepted, even grudgingly, if the truth and the whole truth is told to the public. When the Bill Bennett government came into office in 1975 we found a public government car insurance company, founded about 18 months before, that had managed to lose nearly $200 million with a monopoly! We immediately raised premiums so as to make the company viable and all hell broke loose, amongst our supporters as well as the general public. We had, however, told the entire story to the public and they came to accept if not like our policy. The message from my experience, minister, is don’t ever lie to the public. I’m afraid that my advice is too late for you.

Here is what we will be doing: I give you this in the hopes that you will send a MLA – or either or both of you and the premier for that matter – so we can let the public decide who is telling the truth.

With the help of Damien’s great camera work we will show the people just what these “little run of the river” projects really look like.

We will debunk the nonsense that these weirs (the Independent Power people don’t like to call them dams, which they are) are being built by little people, Mom and Pop operations, as the expression goes.

We will show the enormous damage done by roads and transmission lines to and from the “weir”.

We will outline the true cost of these “little ol’ weirs” in terms of destruction of ecologies these rivers support.

We will go right to the root of the matter and demonstrate beyond doubt that whatever our power needs may be now or in the future, they cannot be met by Independent Power Producers (IPPs).

We will demonstrate how your government has forced BC Hydro to pay, on a “take or pay” basis, 2-3 times what it can sell that power for.

We will demonstrate why IPP power is of virtually no use to BC Hydro and its shareholders (us) because it mainly comes at high run-off time when BC Hydro doesn’t need it and thus must sell it at a loss or, if it chooses to use that power, must pay to the IPPs about 8 times what it can produce it for itself.

We will show how your policies are bankrupting BC Hydro and – are you ready for this? – how BC Hydro will no longer be able to pay its handsome annual dividend to the government unless it raises the rates to consumers to get the money!

The public will understand well the calamity that your energy policy is because we are telling the truth, backed up by independent experts, while the Campbell government relies upon one falsehood after another; because on this and most other issues, your government has practiced gross deceit and the public knows it.

You and your government, Mr Hansen, have done enormous permanent damage and it cannot all be undone. But the jig is up. And though the forfeit is piddling compared ti what it should be, you and your colleagues will be expunged from your seats of power by a population that knows it’s been lied to.

POSTSCRIPT: I do not say that Campbell and Hansen are liars – just that on the occasions referred to they were lying.